Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| |
blog:2024:1113_thinking_reflective_judgment_and_ai_design [2024/11/13 17:41] – created mchiasson | blog:2024:1113_thinking_reflective_judgment_and_ai_design [2024/11/13 17:41] (current) – mchiasson |
---|
| |
There is a double aspect to humans, participation, and the design of artificial intelligence systems. It's clear in Hannah's work and the philosophers she draws upon, that "thinking" is only a human activity. Of course, in their time, there may have been limited technology, certainly in Socrates' but also Hannah's time. And so her studies and critiques of technical rationality could only be based on advanced techniques and rules ([[:technical rationality]]) used by people to make decisions. | There is a double aspect to humans, participation, and the design of artificial intelligence systems. It's clear in Hannah's work and the philosophers she draws upon, that "thinking" is only a human activity. Of course, in their time, there may have been limited technology, certainly in Socrates' but also Hannah's time. And so her studies and critiques of technical rationality could only be based on advanced techniques and rules ([[:technical rationality]]) used by people to make decisions. |
| |
| ===== More ===== |
| |
| |
However, as Feenberg comments, her theory doesn't take into account the word or concept of technology, even though her mentors and contemporaries did, such as Heidegger. And so as we turn to the artificial intelligence system used by the schools to determine at-risk people who require funding and lunches, Arendt and Hedeigger's critiques are not just about the over-creeping of technical specificity. Taking into account participation as "part taking", that the people most affected by the AI design and the resulting funding decisions are absent from any real conversations about the systems produced to categorize them speaks to a whole range of critical theoretical worries. | However, as Feenberg comments, her theory doesn't take into account the word or concept of technology, even though her mentors and contemporaries did, such as Heidegger. And so as we turn to the artificial intelligence system used by the schools to determine at-risk people who require funding and lunches, Arendt and Hedeigger's critiques are not just about the over-creeping of technical specificity. Taking into account participation as "part taking", that the people most affected by the AI design and the resulting funding decisions are absent from any real conversations about the systems produced to categorize them speaks to a whole range of critical theoretical worries. |